As I indicated in the thread above, I am reading a book about UFOs containing the eyewitness testimony of a number of high ranking military officials, including fighter pilots and commercial pilots. In that thread, some responders labeled UFOs as demons. One night I decided to do a short Bible study on the topic, to see if there are any references to Satan or demons that might connect them with strange lights in the sky.

I am curious to know whether the following verses could point to demons as UFOs or whether I am misinterpreting their meaning.

Isaiah may refer to Satan as the morning star, something like the glowing orbs that people point to as UFOs.

"How have you fallen from the heavens, O morning star, son of the dawn! How are you cut down to the ground, you who mowed down the nations! You said in your heart: "I will scale the heavens; Above the stars of God I will set up my throne; I will take my seat on the Mount of Assembly, in the recesses of the North. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will be like the Most High!" Yet down to the nether world you go to the recesses of the pit!" (Isaiah 14:12-15)

"You were dead in your transgressions and sins in which you once lived following the age of this world, 4 following the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the disobedient." (Ephesians 2:2)

Finally, the Revelation of St John speaks of a star that falls to the earth and unleashes demonic forces from within the Earth.

"Then the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star 2 that had fallen from the sky to the earth. It was given the key for the passage to the abyss." (Revelations 9:1)

Because the causes of alleged 'UFO sightings' by pilots are known: what is actually happening is that the pilots are blacking out and losing consciousness....the UFO's they think they see are hallucinations brought on by the flight conditions....there has been extensive study and research on this and the effects of high speed air travel at high altitudes upon pilots are widely known in the industry. The reason why this is not more widely known among the general public is because the 'UFO conspiracy' crowd wants to demagogue a basic scientific question.

Because the causes of alleged 'UFO sightings' by pilots are known: what is actually happening is that the pilots are blacking out and losing consciousness....the UFO's they think they see are hallucinations brought on by the flight conditions....there has been extensive study and research on this and the effects of high speed air travel at high altitudes upon pilots are widely known in the industry. The reason why this is not more widely known among the general public is because the 'UFO conspiracy' crowd wants to demagogue a basic scientific question.

I don't think the UFO phenomenon is demonic or extra-terrestrial. But from the time I bought Ruppelt's REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, in 1956, to the last of many books on the subject, whatever it was, that I bought years later, I don't recall this as a specific claim, in specific cases, but as a dismissal, generally. What are you reading or referencing, and where is it found?

Because the causes of alleged 'UFO sightings' by pilots are known: what is actually happening is that the pilots are blacking out and losing consciousness....the UFO's they think they see are hallucinations brought on by the flight conditions....there has been extensive study and research on this and the effects of high speed air travel at high altitudes upon pilots are widely known in the industry. The reason why this is not more widely known among the general public is because the 'UFO conspiracy' crowd wants to demagogue a basic scientific question.

I don't think the UFO phenomenon is demonic or extra-terrestrial. But from the time I bought Ruppelt's REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, in 1956, to the last of many books on the subject, whatever it was, that I bought years later, I don't recall this as a specific claim, in specific cases, but as a dismissal, generally. What are you reading or referencing, and where is it found?

GKC

It's something I've picked up from the many hours of 'debunking UFO sightings documentaries I have seen.

I am talking specifically of when pilots claim to see a flying object in the distance that they try to chase but can't catch...the fact that the people on the ground viewing the radar can't see anything else in the sky except the pilot has always a reason to be suspicious, if something is there, how come none of the instruments can detect it? You know when you are blacking out you can see 'black spots' in front of you? That's what the UFO's the pilots were chasing were caused by....today the effects of high speed and high altitude on pilots are better known, so these kinds of sightings are less common. Other causes, besides the 'blackout' are optical illusions caused by how the light is reflected.

The UFO's that are seen by people on the ground are usually either experimental aircraft (prototypes of the SR-71 Blackbird were often reported as UFO's during the testing phases) or weather balloons...the bulk of the remainder are optical illusions.

There is a certain percentage of UFO sightings that are still unexplained after going through all the usual explanations, but of course there is a difference between 'unexplained' and aliens or demons.

Because the causes of alleged 'UFO sightings' by pilots are known: what is actually happening is that the pilots are blacking out and losing consciousness....the UFO's they think they see are hallucinations brought on by the flight conditions....there has been extensive study and research on this and the effects of high speed air travel at high altitudes upon pilots are widely known in the industry. The reason why this is not more widely known among the general public is because the 'UFO conspiracy' crowd wants to demagogue a basic scientific question.

I don't think the UFO phenomenon is demonic or extra-terrestrial. But from the time I bought Ruppelt's REPORT ON UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS, in 1956, to the last of many books on the subject, whatever it was, that I bought years later, I don't recall this as a specific claim, in specific cases, but as a dismissal, generally. What are you reading or referencing, and where is it found?

GKC

It's something I've picked up from the many hours of 'debunking UFO sightings documentaries I have seen.

I am talking specifically of when pilots claim to see a flying object in the distance that they try to chase but can't catch...the fact that the people on the ground viewing the radar can't see anything else in the sky except the pilot has always a reason to be suspicious, if something is there, how come none of the instruments can detect it? You know when you are blacking out you can see 'black spots' in front of you? That's what the UFO's the pilots were chasing were caused by....today the effects of high speed and high altitude on pilots are better known, so these kinds of sightings are less common. Other causes, besides the 'blackout' are optical illusions caused by how the light is reflected.

The UFO's that are seen by people on the ground are usually either experimental aircraft (prototypes of the SR-71 Blackbird were often reported as UFO's during the testing phases) or weather balloons...the bulk of the remainder are optical illusions.

There is a certain percentage of UFO sightings that are still unexplained after going through all the usual explanations, but of course there is a difference between 'unexplained' and aliens or demons.

I agree with your closing sentence.

But I would need specifics on specific cases, rationally presented, to accept the idea that hallucination is the generic answer, as to pilots.

Isaac Asimov made the very compelling and rational case that alien's from other planets were not visiting us years ago (see The Planet That Wasn't). If anybody would have made the case that there were are extraterrestrials visiting Earth, it would have been him.

There are no little green men, women, plants, animals, silicon or carbon-based or bug-derrived life forms paying us a visit.

The notion there are visits by creatures from another planet is just plain silliness at best and delusional at worse.

_________________"So mercifully blessed to be free from the ravages of intelligence." - Taken from Time Bandits

UFOs are Unidentified Flying Objects and nothing more. Unidentified means unidentified regardless of any particular theory, guess or assumption; if anyone knew what they were they wouldn't be unidentified!

Demons? No. Demons are NOT physical objects but rather spiritual beings.

Is there life on other planets? According to scientists, probably. What form it takes has yet to be determined.

The "morning star" is usually a reference to Venus (occasionally Murcury), other references to 'stars' in the bible are not meant to be taken literally while stars falling from the sky (shooting stars) would have been more visible in ancient times because of the lack of light pollution. On occasion these can be seen in daylight because of their size when entering the earth's atmosphere. The use of shooting stars as a comparison with falling angels (demons) would be intended to make it easier to understand the spiritual meaning.

UFOs are Unidentified Flying Objects and nothing more. Unidentified means unidentified regardless of any particular theory, guess or assumption; if anyone knew what they were they wouldn't be unidentified!

Demons? No. Demons are NOT physical objects but rather spiritual beings.

Is there life on other planets? According to scientists, probably. What form it takes has yet to be determined.

The "morning star" is usually a reference to Venus (occasionally Murcury), other references to 'stars' in the bible are not meant to be taken literally while stars falling from the sky (shooting stars) would have been more visible in ancient times because of the lack of light pollution. On occasion these can be seen in daylight because of their size when entering the earth's atmosphere. The use of shooting stars as a comparison with falling angels (demons) would be intended to make it easier to understand the spiritual meaning.

Well, thanks for answering my question. I'd like to get some other answers on point, too.

What would be the point of Demons being UFOs? Like, what does that accomplish for them?

Xavier wrote:

Mick wrote:

UFOs are Unidentified Flying Objects and nothing more. Unidentified means unidentified regardless of any particular theory, guess or assumption; if anyone knew what they were they wouldn't be unidentified!

Demons? No. Demons are NOT physical objects but rather spiritual beings.

Is there life on other planets? According to scientists, probably. What form it takes has yet to be determined.

The "morning star" is usually a reference to Venus (occasionally Murcury), other references to 'stars' in the bible are not meant to be taken literally while stars falling from the sky (shooting stars) would have been more visible in ancient times because of the lack of light pollution. On occasion these can be seen in daylight because of their size when entering the earth's atmosphere. The use of shooting stars as a comparison with falling angels (demons) would be intended to make it easier to understand the spiritual meaning.

Well, thanks for answering my question. I'd like to get some other answers on point, too.

The assumption is plausible. If one removes all other logical explanation as explained above, it is possible that they are demons because the concept of aliens is IMO, implicitly is in opposition to Catholic doctrine and runs a risk of at most reducing God to the level of the deist or at worst cultivates atheism. This is also assuming that abduction cases which leave physical evidence behind cannot be explained either (like hallucinations, REM, etc.).

Let me explain, I don't claim to be a super expert but this is what I have been thinking about recently, someone else here of a high theological caliber can feel free to correct me.

If other rational physical created being exist then they too would have some sort of chance at salvation since God created them.

Either

1. A one time decision of good or evil like the angels

2. Some type of later atonement.

3. They never fell (into their own original sin) in the first place.

As for 1. I am not sure this flies as the created universe is, as far as I can tell, a condition that was setup in order for man to have many chances at salvation. My premise here is simply my musings and I would like someone who knows more to tell me if I am right. I deduce this from the fact that angels, who are purely spiritual, got a single chance to decide good and evil while man even after choosing evil has a chance of redemption. The only difference is that man is both body and spirit; therefore the created world enables man to turn to God without being instantly damned like a purely spiritual being.

Logically then aliens would have to have fallen like man.

That said, we get to point 2.If aliens can be saved then God must take on their nature as well. Hence Christ would have to be Incarnate and assume their nature in order to save it.

First one can say to me “God can save people however he likes” okay, well I guess that's true. If an alien sins and therefore infinitely offends God then what is the method of their salvation? What is their method of redemption from that infinite offense?

We have serious issues with Dogma here (I think). One would have to say that Jesus assuming a human nature entails that all rational creatures in the universe are saved even though he did not assume their nature. OR one would have to redefine human nature as “rational nature” and I think we would still run into difficulty.

Number 3. is strange too because if they never fell then they would know God and have infused knowledge, so why are they quasi-secretly flying around and taking people against their will?

Further is the fact that “Adam and Eve brought death into the world.” If aliens exist then did Adam and Eve bring death to their world through the fall? Or does this only apply to earth? Did they bring death to other rational creatures across the universe? Or are aliens therefore immortal?

Additionally if you study this stuff the UFO community appears to be into all sorts of theories about how aliens move human history, that ancient people saw UFOs and thought they were gods, or that aliens cause modern day apparitions of Mary etc. See where this is going?

Etc.. etc.. etc.. I'm probably wrong here but I just can't seem to reconcile it myself. If I'm right about anything here then there seems to be a problem with the concept of aliens and dogma.

_________________-Alexander"The proof of love is to suffer for the one you love." -St. Pio

The whole problem with the attempt to explain UFO's are either genuine aliens or demons is the fact that the phenomenon started with manned human flight.....since the UFO phenomenon started with manned human flight, it is logical to conclude that it is a byproduct of manned human flight...it is not as if we have thousands of years of recorded UFO sightings, we don't, they started in the 1940's.....

The whole problem with the attempt to explain UFO's are either genuine aliens or demons is the fact that the phenomenon started with manned human flight.....since the UFO phenomenon started with manned human flight, it is logical to conclude that it is a byproduct of manned human flight...it is not as if we have thousands of years of recorded UFO sightings, we don't, they started in the 1940's.....

I'm not going to try and look up my books, where ere they may be, on UFO history, but this is not accurate. The phenomenon of strange lights, shapes, objects, figures, thingies and whatnots in the sky dates back many years. Charles Fort's BOOK OF THE DAMNED (1919) has a lengthy section on such. I'm not going to try and look my Fort books, either.

The whole problem with the attempt to explain UFO's are either genuine aliens or demons is the fact that the phenomenon started with manned human flight.....since the UFO phenomenon started with manned human flight, it is logical to conclude that it is a byproduct of manned human flight...it is not as if we have thousands of years of recorded UFO sightings, we don't, they started in the 1940's.....

I'm not going to try and look up my books, where ere they may be, on UFO history, but this is not accurate. The phenomenon of strange lights, shapes, objects, figures, thingies and whatnots in the sky dates back many years. Charles Fort's BOOK OF THE DAMNED (1919) has a lengthy section on such. I'm not going to try and look my Fort books, either.

GKC

I would say that 'lights in the sky' is quite different from a UFO, a light in the sky is stationary, to be a UFO you have to be seen to be flying

I would say that 'lights in the sky' is quite different from a UFO, a light in the sky is stationary, to be a UFO you have to be seen to be flying

Of course GKC enumerated many more things than "lights in the sky." Also, it is worthwhile to point out -- if there are such strange objects in the sky -- that people did not recognize them as spacecraft because they had no reference for it. It was only with the advent of manned flight that people recognized UFOs as flying craft.

The whole problem with the attempt to explain UFO's are either genuine aliens or demons is the fact that the phenomenon started with manned human flight.....since the UFO phenomenon started with manned human flight, it is logical to conclude that it is a byproduct of manned human flight...it is not as if we have thousands of years of recorded UFO sightings, we don't, they started in the 1940's.....

I'm not going to try and look up my books, where ere they may be, on UFO history, but this is not accurate. The phenomenon of strange lights, shapes, objects, figures, thingies and whatnots in the sky dates back many years. Charles Fort's BOOK OF THE DAMNED (1919) has a lengthy section on such. I'm not going to try and look my Fort books, either.

GKC

I would say that 'lights in the sky' is quite different from a UFO, a light in the sky is stationary, to be a UFO you have to be seen to be flying

No, lights in the sky that were stationary, mobile, came and went. And other things too.

I would say that 'lights in the sky' is quite different from a UFO, a light in the sky is stationary, to be a UFO you have to be seen to be flying

Of course GKC enumerated many more things than "lights in the sky." Also, it is worthwhile to point out -- if there are such strange objects in the sky -- that people did not recognize them as spacecraft because they had no reference for it. It was only with the advent of manned flight that people recognized UFOs as flying craft.

Correct, mostly. They interpreted them in keeping with the times. Some saw them as angels, demons, dragons, "signs"/portents in general, Disks might be called shields, tubular shapes as spears or snakes, etc. Anything not identifiable would likely be seen in terms of the analogous or familiar.

After manned balloons were known, in the 18th century, they might be compared to balloons, mutatis mutandis. In the late 1800s, a common description was like a cigar, and often called an airship. In WWII, foo fighters were described as balls of light, but named in keeping with the familiar aerial terminology.